3M22 Zircon Hypersonic Cruise Missile

George1 wrote:Trials of Zircon hypersonic missiles on ships and submarines to start in 2019 — source

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1033298

Great!

Arrow wrote:Cirkon was supposed to be on service in 2017. Standard few years of delay.

Zirkon, not cirkon.No One have nothing like that, Russia don`t owe you anything. Standard troll of Arrow.

Arrow wrote:Cirkon was supposed to be on service in 2017. Standard few years of delay.

and refresh my memory how many years behind X-51? oh shit, no no still years ahead

Source: Zircon hypersonic missiles will be tested on ships and submarines in 2019

It is assumed that "the shooting will be held in the landfills of the Northern Fleet"

MOSCOW, November 29th. / TASS /. State tests of Russian hypersonic anti-ship missiles "Zircon" from ships and submarines will begin in 2019. This was reported TASS source in the military-industrial complex of the Russian Federation.
"In 2019, it is planned to begin state tests of the Zircon from sea carriers, both from surface ships and from submarines," the agency’s source said. He clarified that "the shooting will be carried out in the marine polygons of the Northern Fleet."

The company-developer of the rocket NPO Mashinostroyenia did not comment on the TASS information provided by the source.

The firing range of the Zircon, according to open data, is about 400 km, the flight speed is indicated in the region of 4-6 Mach. As previously reported, the Zirkon missiles will be launched using the Universal Ship Rifle Complex (UCSS) with vertical launchers, which is used for the Caliber and Onyx missiles. Such UBCS, in particular, are installed on the corvettes of the project 20380, the frigates of the project 22350, the submarines of the project 885 of the type "Ash".

Also, according to TASS sources, the Zircons should arm the Russian nuclear-powered missile cruisers Peter the Great and Admiral Nakhimov.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/5848788

Is it possible that they're equipping the Zircon in 650mm torpedo tubes as opposed to UKSK cells?
Like the RPK-7 Veter, that's cold-launched from a torpedo-tube and then ignites its engine while in the water?

flamming_python wrote:Is it possible that they're equipping the Zircon in 650mm torpedo tubes as opposed to UKSK cells?
Like the RPK-7 Veter, that's cold-launched from a torpedo-tube and then ignites its engine while in the water?

well I hope, Husky is to carry Zircons and doesnt seem to have VLS.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

flamming_python wrote:Is it possible that they're equipping the Zircon in 650mm torpedo tubes as opposed to UKSK cells?
Like the RPK-7 Veter, that's cold-launched from a torpedo-tube and then ignites its engine while in the water?

well I hope, Husky is to carry Zircons and doesnt seem to have VLS.

Pictures I have seem show VLS, have you different info?

and refresh my memory how many years behind X-51?

And when is X-51 going into military acceptance tests?

flight speed is indicated in the region of 4-6 Mach

Thats a fair bit slower than expected, I thought it was supposed to be 7+

Is it possible that they're equipping the Zircon in 650mm torpedo tubes as opposed to UKSK cells?

The quote is explicitly UKSK VLS, I was thinking it'd be handy if it fits in 533mm like Kalibr -> Kilo/Lada would be able to use them.

LMFS wrote:
Pictures I have seem show VLS, have you different info?

on this I didnt


on this I did




so which one is the final design?

hoom wrote:

and refresh my memory how many years behind X-51?

And when is X-51 going into military acceptance tests?

we have to wait for X-51

flight speed is indicated in the region of 4-6 Mach

Thats a fair bit slower than expected, I thought it was supposed to be 7+  

meh, as lognas it not official I would not care about journos "leaks"

hoom wrote:

Is it possible that they're equipping the Zircon in 650mm torpedo tubes as opposed to UKSK cells?

The quote is explicitly UKSK VLS, I was thinking it'd be handy if it fits in 533mm like Kalibr -> Kilo/Lada would be able to use them.

[/quote]

Then Ladas unlikely will have zircons

Cirkon was supposed to be on service in 2017. Standard few years of delay.

Still hard to explain to a layman how the US is ahead in everything, and invents everything, yet the Onyx... the missile the Zircon is going to replace is actually vastly superior than any air breathing US anti ship missile...

Zircon will double its speed capability at least.

Is it possible that they're equipping the Zircon in 650mm torpedo tubes as opposed to UKSK cells?
Like the RPK-7 Veter, that's cold-launched from a torpedo-tube and then ignites its engine while in the water?

Possible they could go for both... the UKSK is a universal launcher so you would expect all new weapons would be designed to be compatible... it also means that even brand new missiles can be immediately widely deployed based on missile production rather than platform production.

Likely all the vessels would need would be a software upgrade to use the new missile.

Thats a fair bit slower than expected, I thought it was supposed to be 7+

As it burns fuel in flight it will likely get lighter and faster, but I don't think they would reveal the actual flight performance anyway.

GarryB wrote:

Thats a fair bit slower than expected, I thought it was supposed to be 7+

As it burns fuel in flight it will likely get lighter and faster, but I don't think they would reveal the actual flight performance anyway.

Didn't they claim it was tested to 8 M?

TASS.

Nuff said.

Didn't they claim it was tested to 8 M?

I rather suspect the first ones might get the mach 6-7 speed, but as they improve the design and create more effective and more efficient engines the speed will only increase... I remember them talking about speed of between mach 6 and mach 8... which is fully twice as fast as Onyx.

I suspect those speeds will only be achieved at a quasi-ballistic trajectory; part of the Zirkon's initial and main stage.

In the terminal stage the Zirkon will either drop to sea-skimming altitude or dive onto the target. For both it will have to slow down to supersonic speeds; both for manuevering and for targetting.

With a rocket propulsion like the Iskander then I would agree as it is pretty much accelerate and then glide and then fall to the target, but with this new missile generally the solid rocket booster will accelerate it to something like mach 3-5 or so and then the scramjet engine will accelerate the missile to full speed... from ground or sea surface launches a lot of the energy from the solid rocket booster will be used climbing as well as accelerating, whereas air launched models could use all that solid rocket fuel power to get to high speed.

The point is that a turbojet engine loses power when it gets to its speed upper limits because the air flowing through it can't flow faster than supersonic speeds, but with a scramjet engine high speeds are not a problem and you can continue to get better thrust as you get faster.

For a normal jet engine of any type including Ramjet the airflow through the combustion chamber (the hot area of the engine) has to be subsonic for the fuel to burn so as you fly faster and faster you have to slow the air going into the engine down so you can burn fuel... so at mach 2.83 in a MiG-31 the airflow has to be restricted and reduced so that it is subsonic going through the hot parts of the engine... which then has to accelerate the airflow back up to a level where it actually generates thrust instead of drag. This can be helped with bypass air that does not get slowed down, but it is still a challenge because bypass air does not add to thrust in the sense that it on its own wont keep the aircraft at the speed it is going.

In comparison a supersonic combustion ramjet or scramjet can burn fuel flowing through the engine at the speed it is coming in so it can go out much much faster because it does not need to be slowed down...

Being a type of jet engine the scramjet can be throttled to use onboard fuel much more efficiently... to add power when needed but to also conserve fuel in a cruise mode when it does not need power.

I would say the vast majority of the time it will fly high and very fast and will use its ability to manouver to evade defences rather than fly very low to hide from them, because the drag at low altitudes would likely render it supersonic instead of hypersonic...

Targeting should not be an issue... Iskander has a speed of about mach 7 or so and the air launched Kinzhal model Mach 10 if the numbers are to be believed... from altitude it should be able to spot its targets from enormous distances...

flamming_python wrote:In the terminal stage the Zirkon will either drop to sea-skimming altitude or dive onto the target. For both it will have to slow down to supersonic speeds; both for manuevering and for targetting.

Why would Zircon need to drop its speed to supersonic for a dive attack? Iskander and Khinzhal don't...

Air is thicker down low -> more drag -> for the same thrust you go slower at low altitude.
Thats not a voluntary slow down though.
I guess you might need to for thermal reasons?

Big_Gazza wrote:

flamming_python wrote:In the terminal stage the Zirkon will either drop to sea-skimming altitude or dive onto the target. For both it will have to slow down to supersonic speeds; both for manuevering and for targetting.

Why would Zircon need to drop its speed to supersonic for a dive attack?  Iskander and Khinzhal don't...

Terminal-stage manuevers against ABMs and corrections for the ship's movements. Even a much slower missile can intercept your hypersonic one if your missile's trajectory is entirely predictable.
Also, if it's targetting a specific place on the ship, it would need more corrections and it would also need working sensors. Sensors don't work when you've got a thick envelope of plasma engulfing your nosecone as you're moving at Mach 6-7.

The opacity of plasma to all kinds of signals in particular is a problem that no-one has solved and is even more of a reason why we don't see hypersonic cruise missiles today; more so that the stresses and materials that such speeds require.

The Iskander has the same problems. It does achieve hypersonic speeds AFAIK but it slows down in the terminal stage.

The Iskander has the same problems. It does achieve hypersonic speeds AFAIK but it slows down in the terminal stage.

Iskander slows down because it is not ballistic... it has a flight path that is not fully powered... the loss of speed is preferable to slightly higher speed but predictable flight path.

Iskander also has inertial guidance, and terminal optical guidance.... neither of which are affected by flight speed.

On the new model of the Kh-58 (AS-11) they have cheek mounted IR sensors... so sensors don't need to be in the tip of the nose... the Igla-1 uses an aerospike to push the air aside so its round nose needed for the IR sensor can be used on a supersonic missile.

The Mistral MANPAD uses a pointed shape that is aerodynamic, but not so good for the IR sensor being used.

Isos wrote:

Arrow wrote:

So how S-400 and S-300V are guided. Missile from S-300V4 has 2.6 km/s max speed.

Max speed is at high altitude where there is less oxygene so less drag so plasma formation harder to happen.

Plus command-guidance from the S-300/S-400 radars even if it does happen

GarryB wrote:Iskander also has inertial guidance, and terminal optical guidance.... neither of which are affected by flight speed.

Inertial guidance won't be affected, neither would GLONASS guidance; but any kind of optic, radar-seeking or infrared guidance won't work when you've got that opaque plasma envelope in front of you AFAIK

Russia again successfully tests ship-based hypersonic missile — which will likely be ready for combat by 2022

POINTS

Russia has successfully tested a ship-based hypersonic missile the United States is currently unable to defend against, according to people with direct knowledge of U.S. intelligence reports.

The weapon is expected to join Moscow’s arsenal by 2022.

The latest development gives the U.S. even more ground to make up as Russia and China bolster their arsenals with hypersonic weapons at a breakneck pace

Russia has successfully tested a ship-based hypersonic missile the United States is currently unable to defend against, according to people with direct knowledge of U.S. intelligence reports.
The weapon is expected to join Moscow’s arsenal by 2022.

WASHINGTON — Russia has conducted another successful test of its ship-based hypersonic missile, a weapon the United States is currently unable to defend against, according to two people with direct knowledge of a U.S. intelligence report.

The people, who spoke to CNBC on the condition of anonymity, said Russia has carried out five total tests of its ship-based hypersonic missile since 2015.

The last known test of the device, dubbed “Tsirkon,” was successfully conducted Dec. 10 and reached a top speed of Mach 8, approximately eight times the speed of sound, or about two miles per second.

“What we are seeing with this particular weapon is that the Russians designed it to have a dual-purpose capability, meaning, it can be used against a target on land as well as a vessel at sea,” one source explained. “Last week’s successful test showed that the Russians were able to achieve sustained flight, a feat that is crucial in the development of hypersonic weapons.”

The U.S. intelligence report, according to one source, noted that production of the missile is slated to begin in 2021 and it will join the Kremlin’s arsenal no earlier than 2022.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/20/russia-tests-hypersonic-missile-that-could-be-ready-for-war-by-2022.html

The Arrow mhytical Zirkon from American sources!

MOSCOW, Dec 21 - RIA News . The developer of the ship-based hypersonic rocket "Zirkon" - the NPO of mechanical engineering - did not comment on the information about the successful tests of the rocket.

https://ria.ru/20181221/1548417609.html